<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2005 (9) TMI 442 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=116700</link>
    <description>The Tribunal upheld the Revenue authorities&#039; classification of imported goods under Customs Tariff heading 8543.89 as electrical machinery and apparatus with individual functions, rather than under heading 9030.09 as parts of Television metering equipment. The Tribunal emphasized the importance of considering the actual function of the goods in determining their classification, highlighting the distinction between instruments for measuring electrical quantities and components of a television audience measurement system. The appellant&#039;s failure to provide satisfactory grounds for their classification claim led to the rejection of the appeal.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 22 Sep 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 14 Jun 2012 18:40:22 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=153698" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2005 (9) TMI 442 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=116700</link>
      <description>The Tribunal upheld the Revenue authorities&#039; classification of imported goods under Customs Tariff heading 8543.89 as electrical machinery and apparatus with individual functions, rather than under heading 9030.09 as parts of Television metering equipment. The Tribunal emphasized the importance of considering the actual function of the goods in determining their classification, highlighting the distinction between instruments for measuring electrical quantities and components of a television audience measurement system. The appellant&#039;s failure to provide satisfactory grounds for their classification claim led to the rejection of the appeal.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 22 Sep 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=116700</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>